Capitalism isn't bad. It's the best way to create wealth. It becomes a bad thing when some people start to get so much money it's not even real. Money they won't be able to spend in a lifetime... or in 5 generations lifetims. It becomes a really bad thing when other people don't have enough money to live.

That's the same thing with communism. Communism ? Excellent idea. But you also need to create wealth.

Capitalism is a good concept as long as you add a pinch (and a big one) of socialism.

Moto> Taking a risk ? ok... but what about the bosses of huge companies who are paid incredible amounts of money when really, they are just employees ... and they don't care about being fired because they negotiate goooood money for when they are actually fired ? Where is the risk in that ?

Nothing is perfect. No doubt some make WAY, WAY more than they are ever worth. It borderlines being ridiculous....they can be fired however. They can go to jail. Ever try to fire or imprison a government official or communist dictator?

The only people who bitch and moan about their fair share and shared wealth and societal fucking cumbyiaaaah are the ones who can't compete or won't compete. There is no question that capitalism is far and away THE BEST. MOST FAIR syetm on the planet. You want to get ahead?...work harder. You want to get smarter?...study more. You invent something?..you own it. You can make your own breaks and you can be broken. What exactly is so fair about taking from someone else things you didn't earn?

08-05-2013

Paint_It_Black

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOTO13

Ever try to fire or imprison a government official or communist dictator?

Government officials are fired all the time. Government officials are imprisoned regularly enough too. Have you ever heard of \Berlusconi? Unlikely, I suppose, since you're probably massively US-centric. Still, try doing a little research before making ridiculous claims.

Oh, and dictators are overthrown all the time. Again, maybe read the news or something?

08-05-2013

Llamas

The former prime minister of Slovenia was basically protested into stepping down, and is now on trial. Slovenia is semi-socialist (and had the highest income equality in the world in 2012). Just because the GWB government was never punished for their crimes doesn't mean that government people are automatically immune to the law.

08-05-2013

MOTO13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black

Government officials are fired all the time. Government officials are imprisoned regularly enough too. Have you ever heard of \Berlusconi? Unlikely, I suppose, since you're probably massively US-centric. Still, try doing a little research before making ridiculous claims.

Oh, and dictators are overthrown all the time. Again, maybe read the news or something?

Whoever the hell Ballsuckscuntlloni is, most don't care. My point, which was obviously lost, at least on you, is quite simple. I would rather have the ability to fire CEO for ruining a company than try to take down a dicktater of an entire god damn country any day of the week. And yes, I was speaking from the viewpoint of the USA, because seriously, who gives a shit about Italy?

08-05-2013

Paint_It_Black

I expected you to deny your ignorance but I see you've chosen to embrace it. I'm not sure if that's better or worse.

How exactly do you believe you have the power to fire the CEO of a company? They actually are much like dictators. To overthrow a dictator you generally need his own military to turn on him. To overthrow a CEO you need his own board members or share holders or whatever to turn on him. You, MOTO, don't get a say in anything. You don't have the power to do anything. And you know what else? It's easier to convict government officials than these CEOs you love so much. When they ruin companies and break the law they don't get fired and they don't go to prison. At worst they resign and then pop up again 6 months later running some other company.

You're living in some dream world that only exists on Fox News.

08-05-2013

Tiny Vessels

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black

You're living in some dream world that only exists on Fox News.

Yeah MOTO does for sure.

08-06-2013

MOTO13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paint_It_Black

I expected you to deny your ignorance but I see you've chosen to embrace it. I'm not sure if that's better or worse.

How exactly do you believe you have the power to fire the CEO of a company? They actually are much like dictators. To overthrow a dictator you generally need his own military to turn on him. To overthrow a CEO you need his own board members or share holders or whatever to turn on him. You, MOTO, don't get a say in anything. You don't have the power to do anything. And you know what else? It's easier to convict government officials than these CEOs you love so much. When they ruin companies and break the law they don't get fired and they don't go to prison. At worst they resign and then pop up again 6 months later running some other company.

You're living in some dream world that only exists on Fox News.

Don't be so fucking simplistic. Of course one person cannot fire a CEO. I live in a dream world that others call reality. Try it sometime. Convict government officials. That's funny. Who's going to do this...Eric Holder? He'd have to get his face out of Obama's crotch first and that ain't happening anytime soon.

Last time I checked, I never saw CEO's butchering people in order to retain the power of a company. CEO's are generally given contracts. In those contracts/agreements are areas of stock pricing, EPS, market share goals as well as other areas of company perormance. They are many times legally bound by these goals and can be fired for cause. Try that with a dicktater. The BOD's are also legally bound to review CEO peromance. Stockholders not making on their shares is a pretty good reason for a BOD's to can a non-performing CEO.

08-06-2013

Static_Martyr

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOTO13

The BOD's are also legally bound to review CEO peromance. Stockholders not making on their shares is a pretty good reason for a BOD's to can a non-performing CEO.

Because, you know, this happens with the major banks all the time.

08-06-2013

MOTO13

Quote:

Originally Posted by Static_Martyr

Because, you know, this happens with the major banks all the time.

I know that there are stringent mechanisms in place to monitor banks...bank examiners who review loans, collateral etc.... They have the ability to hurt a bank giving out bad loans. I have never had a problem with a bank anyway. What's your bitch with banks? And don't say the mortgage crisis. You get denied for that loan to get that penis implant going? ok...that was a joke.

08-06-2013

Static_Martyr

Quote:

Originally Posted by MOTO13

I know that there are stringent mechanisms in place to monitor banks...bank examiners who review loans, collateral etc.... They have the ability to hurt a bank giving out bad loans. I have never had a problem with a bank anyway. What's your bitch with banks? And don't say the mortgage crisis. You get denied for that loan to get that penis implant going? ok...that was a joke.

You mean like private executives being on the board of the Federal Reserve? Or like private banks acting as their own regulators? lol. Because that tooootally worked great up to 2008.